Consensual Relation Between Married Adults Not Sexual Exploitation: Chhattisgarh HC

The Chhattisgarh High Court has granted regular bail to a man accused of sexual assault on the pretext of marriage, emphasizing that consensual relationships between mature, married individuals do not warrant prolonged incarceration during trial.

A single-judge bench of Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey heard the first bail application of the applicant, who had been in custody since July 2024. The Chhattisgarh High Court was tasked with evaluating whether the allegations of sexual exploitation under the guise of marriage could be sustained in a scenario where both the complainant and the accused were already married to other persons. The Bench observed that the maturity of the parties and the nature of their previous marital status are critical factors in determining the gravity of allegations involving broken promises of marriage.

Key Takeaways

Matrimonial Status Matters

Pre-existing marriages of both parties can dilute the claim of 'pretext of marriage' in sexual assault allegations involving mature adults.

Consent and Maturity

Relationships between middle-aged individuals with knowledge of the consequences are often viewed through the lens of consensual conduct rather than exploitation.

Bail as the Rule

Once a charge-sheet is filed and there is no criminal antecedent, the court favors personal liberty over pre-trial detention in cases of alleged consensual relationship.

Court Observations and Directions

The Chhattisgarh High Court noted that the applicant and the victim, both aged around 39-40 years, were married individuals who had engaged in a relationship for over two months. The bench highlighted that the filing of the charge-sheet and the lack of prior criminal records supported the case for bail.

Ratio

In cases involving allegations of sexual assault on the pretext of marriage, the court must consider the age, maturity, and marital status of the parties; where both parties are married adults engaging in a voluntary relationship, the element of 'deceitful promise' is significantly mitigated for the purpose of granting bail.

Background

The prosecution alleged that the applicant sexually assaulted the 39-year-old victim between April and June 2026 under the promise of marriage. Following his refusal to marry, an FIR was lodged under Section 69 of the BNS. The applicant's counsel argued that the relationship was entirely consensual, pointing out that both parties were already married and the victim was a mature woman capable of understanding the nature of the relationship.

The State opposed the bail, contending that the applicant had sexually exploited the victim through false promises. However, the Chhattisgarh High Court found that given the charge-sheet was already filed and the applicant had no prior criminal history, continued detention was not necessary. The bail was granted upon the execution of a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety.

Case Details:
Case No.: MCRC No. 7888 of 2026
Neutral Citation: 2026:CGHC:43969
Case Title: Sohan Bareth vs. State Of Chhattisgarh
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Uday Singh Bhadoriya, Advocate
For the Respondent(s): Ms. Laxmin Kashyap, Panel Lawyer

Source: 2026 CaseBase(CTH) 19889